What Accuracy Rates Can You Expect From SPEECH RECOGNITION Systems? - Linked Health-care 7 great answers from Linked Healthcare!

1. What Accuracy Rates Can You Expect From SPEECH RECOGNITION Systems? 7 Answers! - Uncut Bonus Edition P R E S E N T S

2. We read the question: What accuracy rates can you expect from Speech Recognition systems? Many think that “achieving accuracy rates from Speech Recognition Systems" is a difficult decision to make for hospitals. Many others think that " Speech Recognition Systems " can be a major technological requirement for medical perfection in hospitals . We called on MDs and other doctors to share their experiences on this…. What is your take? LinkedIn ® is a trademark of LinkedIn Corporation Mountain View, CA USA ©2008. Linked Healthcare is a group on LinkedIn. No other affiliation exists. These quotations do not necessarily reflect the opinion of anyone other than the person quoted. Quotations may be attributed incorrectly. This is an unedited edition of “Let the People Speak.” ™ All quotations have been previously made available to the general public. This free resource may be re-quoted with the following attribution: Found at comments on LinkedIn ®

3. ® What accuracy rates do you expect from Speech Recognition Systems? Jeff Ryan wrote: Account Executive at Nuance HealthCare 99 to 100% accuracy can be expected. While most EMR applications automatically insert labs, values etc, content is discreet data that is not necessary to dictate. There is a chance for misinterpreting for low or high calcium, but the exact same can be said about a medical transcriptionists. The provider is to review and sign the document, whether the text is created by a transcriptionist or by speech recognition. Most neutral audits of manual transcription shows a 98% accuracy rate (US transcription) and comparable to slightly lower for off-shore transcription. Regardless of accent or national origin, if you can speak/dictate in coherent sentences, both speech recognition and a medical transcriptionist will struggle, which means the provider will struggle. There are many a happy and satisfied physicians in the US, who's their second language is English, and are comfortable using speech recognition. In total, there are more than 150,000 clinicians using front end speech recognition, and in the radiology space, it's roughly one out of two radiologists using speech recognition. Some speech recognition applications support international accents, so do very well "out of the box". So, we are definitely in the late adaptors of this technology. http://bit.ly/ acroseas

4. Jason Snelling wrote: Product Manager at Converged Communications FZ-LLC It is dependent on your native language and your accent, as the software works on context as well as the sound of the words. If you are using an English voice model but your spoken English is broken and poor, you are not going to get good results. Accent is less of a problem as the software learns through the correction process. however don’t expect 99% accuracy out of the box if you do not conform to one of the pre-defined voice models. It can take a while to get to the 99% level, but it is achievable. If you are using the healthcare vocabularies you will also get better results than using the standard vocabulary. http://bit.ly/ acroseas

5. http://bit.ly/ acroseas Evan Dussia wrote: Chairman of the Board at Medisyn Systems, Inc Accuracy is only part of the equation. Formatting the note takes the most time. I use voice recognition for everything except clinical notes. It is a waste of my time when I can pay a transcriptionist to type and format for a fraction of what it costs me to do the same thing. this conversation is about time and money. I pay my transcriptionist for doing work I don't want to do. I'm capable of typing my notes as well as using a voice recognition system and it is a simple cost accounting exercise that shows it is not worth my time. Assume that a clinical note is 40 lines and it costs $0.18 per line. Her training was one sample note sent to her to show how I like my notes to look. I needed no additional training. Of course she makes mistakes, but I have found that most of the mistakes are mine. And my notes are readable by humans and editable by me using a clinical information management system. If it takes me more than 90 seconds to do the work she does, I am losing time and money. If it does take me an extra 90 seconds per patient to use this tool, over a 25 patient day, I could see at least one more patient that day if I didn't use it.

6. Steve Labkoff wrote: Visionary medical informatics leader healthcare While the accuracy rate of Voice Rec systems is 99-100% the problem remains that if 1 in 100 words is incorrect in the EMR, the meaning of the intended text may dramatically change. For example, if you dictate "hypercalcemia" and the system hears "hypocalcemia" - while both words are technically correctly spelled - and may grammatically be correct in the sentence, the meaning of the therapy, treatment or medical course could be changed. In my experience, until you get to four or five "9's" of accuracy, these systems are going to present issues for straight up dictation translation in a medical setting. The exception to this would be if you have a closed vocabulary - such as radiology dictation or GI procedures where the vocabulary tends to be vastly limited in scope. In these cases, the accuracy issues can largely be abated. It's the open ended text translation that gets you into trouble - especially in a medical setting. http://bit.ly/ acroseas

7. Cathy Leahy wrote: Service Owner at Datamed Medical Transcription If a doctor loses just one minute of productive time, he looses big money. The government incentives won't make up for the loss. Also, the former head of ONC says they will either be deferred or eliminated altogether. All this new fangled stuff is just some new toys for the kids to play with. The danger here is the transcriptionists are looking for other work and schools are eliminating the transcription programs. Donna Literell wrote: President & CEO, Elite Office Solutions In my own transcription business, I have seen two accounts try to move to EMRs. I asked them the same question, "Isn't your time more productively spent seeing patients than typing?" We have had both accounts try EMRs and then come back to us because the physicians hated it and as you said, they realized they were losing money. For one account, we are actually copying-and-pasting into their EMR (because their platform does not have very good tools for transcription), so it's almost double the work, but the doctors realized how insane it was for them to be wasting their time doing what we do. http://bit.ly/ acroseas

8. Chris Grover wrote: President & CEO at InSight Medical Solutions Hey Guys. Even though Jeff is an insider, he is correct. I have seen what is possible in real life clinical action with voice to text EMR usage. It makes sense when you have enough users to employ a Dragon Master for a short consulting gig to fine tune the vocabulary and can be especially beneficial when used in conjunction with an EMR that has a MEDCIN or SNOMED comb to convert the text to discreet data http://bit.ly/ acroseas

9. Stay connected to us on the following platforms: @Acroseas on Twitter acroseasmedicalservices.wordpress.com on Corporate Blog www.acroseas.com on Website :- ®

10. - The End - Brought to you by ACROSEAS LinkedIn ® is a trademark of LinkedIn Corporation Mountain View, CA USA ©2008. Linkedin Healthcare is a group on LinkedIn. No other affiliation exists. These quotations do not necessarily reflect the opinion of anyone other than the person quoted. Quotations may be attributed incorrectly. All quotations have been previously made available to the general public. This free resource may be re-quoted with the following attribution: Comments on LinkedIn http://bit.ly/ acroseas ®